Levi Civita symbol on Curl of Vector cross product

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around the calculation of the curl of a vector cross product involving the Levi Civita symbol, specifically the expression $$\nabla \times \frac{\vec{m} \times \hat{r}}{r^2}$$ where ##\vec{m}## is a vector and ##\hat{r}## is the unit radial vector.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Mathematical reasoning, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the application of the Levi Civita symbol and the implications of using spherical versus Cartesian coordinates. There are attempts to express derivatives and clarify the roles of the vectors involved. Some participants question the correctness of intermediate results and the assumptions regarding the nature of the vector ##\vec{m}##.

Discussion Status

The discussion is ongoing with various interpretations being explored. Some participants have provided insights into the use of the product rule and the definitions of the involved vectors, while others express uncertainty about the derivatives and coordinate systems being used.

Contextual Notes

There is mention of the complexity introduced by the spherical coordinate system and the need to adhere to the problem's requirement of using the Levi Civita symbol. Participants are also grappling with the implications of treating ##\vec{m}## as a constant vector.

Nikitin
Messages
734
Reaction score
27

Homework Statement


Use the LC symbol to calculate the following: $$\nabla \times \frac{\vec{m} \times \hat{r}}{r^2}$$

Where ##\vec{m}## is just a vector, and ##\hat{r}## is the unit radial vector and ##r## is the length of the radial vector.

Homework Equations


On the Levi Civita symbol: http://folk.uio.no/patricg/teaching/a112/levi-civita/

The Attempt at a Solution



I've gotten to ##\epsilon_{kij} \epsilon_{klm} m_l \frac{r^2 \partial_j r_m - r_m \partial_j r^2}{r^4}##, but I don't know how to take the derivatives..
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Nikitin said:
I've gotten to ##\epsilon_{kij} \epsilon_{klm} m_l \frac{r^2 \partial_j r_m - r_m \partial_j r^2}{r^4}##, but I don't know how to take the derivatives..
That result doesn't look right to me. How did you get it? Note that if ##\hat r=\frac{\vec r}{r}##, then
$$\frac{\hat r}{r^2}=\frac{\vec r}{r^3}=\bigg(\frac{r_i}{(r_jr_j)^{\frac 3 2}}\bigg) \hat e_i.$$
 
On the link you provided, there is a proof for ## A\times B \times C=B(A \cdot C) - C(A \cdot B) ## using the LC method.
If ##\vec{m}## is just a vector, does that mean constant, i.e. derivatives equal zero?
That should leave you with something like ## \vec{m} ( \nabla \cdot \frac{\hat{r}}{r^2}) ##
You could also look at ## \frac{\hat{r}}{r^2}=\frac{1}{x^2+y^2+z^2}\hat{r}## so taking the partial derivatives should not be too much of a challenge.
 
Ruber, yes but here you have a curl along with a function (##r^2##) involved.

But shouldn't it be much easier to perform the derivation in spherical coordinates? This is what's creating the struggle.

Fredrik said:
That result doesn't look right to me. How did you get it? Note that if ##\hat r=\frac{\vec r}{r}##, then
$$\frac{\hat r}{r^2}=\frac{\vec r}{r^3}=\bigg(\frac{r_i}{(r_jr_j)^{\frac 3 2}}\bigg) \hat e_i.$$
I just wrote up the definition, ordered the resulting equation and used the product rule to get started with the derivations. Note, my ##r_m##'s are actually the ##m##th coordinate of ##\hat{r}##, of not ##\vec{r}##.

So basically I started with this: $$\epsilon_{ijk} \partial_j \epsilon_{klm} m_l \frac{r_m}{r^2}$$, and used the product rule after ordering to arrive to the equation in the OP.
 
Nikitin said:
Note, my ##r_m##'s are actually the ##m##th coordinate of ##\hat{r}##, of not ##\vec{r}##.
But the derivatives are with respect to the mth coordinate of ##\vec r##, so with your definition of ##r_m##, you don't have ##\partial_i x_j=\delta_{ij}##. Instead you have to do something like this (where ##x_m## is the mth component of ##\vec r=r\hat r##):
$$\partial_i r_j =\frac{\partial}{\partial x_i} r_j =\frac{\partial}{\partial x_i}\frac{x_j}{\sqrt{x_kx_k}}.$$
 
But since ##\hat{r}## is just a one-component vector, shouldn't it be extremely straightforward to use spherical-coordinates ##\partial_i## on it? Why do you change to xyz coordinates?
 
It doesn't seem so straightforward to me. In spherical coordinates, ##\vec{r}## depends on all three coordinates in a relatively complicated way whereas in cartesian coordinates you have simply ##\partial_i x_j = \delta_{ij}##.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Nikitin
I never changed coordinates. I just used the definitions. The cross product is defined by ##x\times y=(x\times y)_i e_i=(\varepsilon_{ijk}x_jy_k) e_i##, where the ##e_i## are the standard basis vectors, not the basis vectors associated with the spherical coordinate system. ##\nabla\times f(x)## is defined similarly, as ##\big(\varepsilon_{ijk}\frac{\partial}{\partial x_j}f_k(x)\big) e_i##.

In this problem, we have
$$f(x)=m\times\frac{\hat r}{r^2}=m\times\frac{\vec r}{r^3},$$ and therefore
$$f_k(x)=\varepsilon_{kln}m_l\frac{x_n}{r^3}=\varepsilon_{kln}m_l\frac{x_n}{(x_px_p)^{\frac 3 2}}.$$ I don't know if there's a way to use both spherical coordinates and the Levi-Civita symbol. (Note that the problem requires you to use the latter). If you know such a way, you can certainly try it.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Nikitin
OK fine I'll just do it as you said. Thanks.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
5K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
7K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
Replies
33
Views
5K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
5K